Say: "If the mankind and the jinns were together to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they helped one another." [Qur'an 17:88]

And if you (Arab pagans, Jews, and Christians) are in doubt concerning that which We have sent down (i.e. the Qur'an) to Our slave (Muhammad Peace be upon him ), then produce a surah (chapter) of the like thereof and call your witnesses (supporters and helpers) besides Allah, if you are truthful. [Qur'an 2:23]

And this Qur'an is not such as could ever be produced by other than Allah (Lord of the heavens and the earth), but it is a confirmation of (the revelation) which was before it [i.e. the Taurat (Torah), and the Injeel (Gospel), etc.], and a full explanation of the Book (i.e. laws and orders, etc, decreed for mankind) - wherein there is no doubt from the the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns,and all that exists).

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it?" Say: "Bring then a surah (chapter) like unto it, and call upon whomsoever you can, besides Allah, if you are truthful!" [Qur'an 10:37-38]

Or they say, "He (Prophet Muhammad(P)) forged it (the Qur'an)." Say: "Bring you then ten forged surah (chapters) like unto it, and call whomsoever you can, other than Allah (to your help), if you speak the truth!" [Qur'an 11:13]

Or do they say: "He (Muhammad(P)) has forged it (this Qur'an)?" Nay! They believe not! Let them then produce a recital like unto it (the Qur'an) if they are truthful. [Qur'an 52:33-34]

Arabic Balaagha Made Easy [scienza della retorica]
Short glimpses into the most beautiful and inspiring aspects of the Arabic language. Discover the beauty of Classical Arabic and enjoy its hidden treasures in the Quran.

So important is the concept of ‘happiness’ in our lives that many people – even dating back to the days of the Greek philosophers – considered its pursuit to be the very purpose of existence.

Indeed, the Qur’an itself speaks of happiness as being one of the rewards of those whom Allah chooses to admit to Paradise. He says of the martyrs in Aal-’Imraan, verse 170,

فَرِحِينَ بِمَا آَتَاهُمُ اللَّهُ مِنْ فَضْلِهِ
They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His Bounty

And of the reward of the pious believers [al-Insaan, verse 11],

فَوَقَاهُمُ اللَّهُ شَرَّ ذَلِكَ الْيَوْمِ وَلَقَّاهُمْ نَضْرَةً وَسُرُورًا
So, Allah saved them from the evil of that Day and gave them a light of beauty and joy.

What becomes immediately apparent upon reading the Arabic text (but once again obscured in the translation) is that two very different words have been used to convey the idea of happiness: فَرِحِينَ fariheena, which is conjugated from the noun فَرَح farah, and سُرُور suroor, and this is prevalent throughout the Qur’an. This is because there are two very different types of happiness being referred to.

فَرَح farah generally refers to transitory delights or pleasures, as is the case in bodily or worldly pleasure. For this reason, most times that فَرَح farah appears in the Qur’an, it is being censured, as in the story of Qarun [al-Qasas, verse 76],

إِنَّ اللهَ لا يُحِبُّ الَفِرحِينَ
Indeed, Allaah does not like the fariheen

But when the source of the farah is specified in the Qur’an, as in the verse from Aal-’Imraan mentioned above, the meaning becomes restricted (muqayyad) and it is no longer censured.

But perhaps a greater distinction between the two lies in the manifestation of the happiness. Whereas the expression of farah is external and with clear outward signs, suroor refers to the expansion of one’s heart with delight or pleasure wherein is quiet or tranquility, and as such it has no external sign. This is indicated by the root from which the word stems – س ر seen raa’ – the same root as the word سرّ sirr, or secret. So suroor is a secret happiness, known to one’s heart but not always seen by others, as Ibn ‘Abbas said in reference to the above verse from al-Insaan, “The نضرة nadrah is on their faces, and the سرور suroor is in their hearts.”

Such distinctions exemplify yet another example in which the translation fails and the original prevails.

To look back to the original meaning of a word is to embark on more than just a linguistic voyage; in some cases, tracing a word back to its original meaning is actually the key to unlocking one of the treasures of the guidance of the Qur’an.

For example, Allaah said in the introduction to the story of Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him),

We relate to you, the best of stories (qasas) in what We have revealed to you of this Qur’an although you were, before it, among the unaware.

wherein the real secret behind Allah relating this story to us lies in none other than the word story itself.

The word being used for story in this verse is qissah قصة (pl. qasas قصص), is derived from the root qaaf-saad ق-ص. The primary connotation of this root is ‘to follow’. This meaning is further evidenced by the verse,

وَقَالَتْ لِأُخْتِهِ قُصِّيهِ

And she said to his sister, “Follow him”

wherein the mother of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) told his sister to follow Musa after the family of the Pharoah had picked him from the river, and the word used by Allah for ‘follow’ in the verse was qusseehi قُصِّيهِ- also derived from the root ق-ص.

Similarly, the juridical term qisaas قصاص referring to the law of equality in punishment, is so called because it involves following in the footsteps of another – doing to one person what they have done to another.

And thus we find that the word qissah قصة (story) as has been used in the Qur’an has been chosen over all other synonyms (such as hadeeth حديث or hikaayah حكاية) because it indicates that the story is not being narrated for the sake of amusement or entertainment, but rather within the word itself lies the explanation that the story is being related for the reader to follow in the footsteps of the one being spoken about in the story… although you were, before it, among the unaware.

Since the issue of rhetorical grandeur in the Qur’an has in recent times captivated the intrigue of many a critic, it seems appropriate to elaborate on the actual import of Qur’anic eloquence here. Imam Muhammad Qasim Nanautwi (may Allah shower His mercy upon him) writes on this point in Barahin Qasimiyyah:

“Balaghah (eloquence) is different from fasahah (articulacy). The former constitutes excellence in congruity and the latter excellence in itself. To elaborate, words are but garments for the meanings they contain, and garments differ in that sometimes they suit the wearer and sometimes they do not. Some of them are made from fine fabric and others from inferior material. Some garments are lavishly decorated and embroidered while others are lacking in such supplementary embellishments.

In the above analogy, appropriateness of words with their underlying meanings is what is meant by excellence in congruity, the refined choice of words used in articulacy by excellence in itself and the embroidery and embellishment that is additionally applied on the garment for decorative purposes should be classified as badi’ (innovativeness).

Based on this, anyone with sound reason can appreciate that fashioning speech and structuring its content are things different to and other than actual balaghah and fasahah, as an eloquent and articulate speech is not merely a name for its theme and structure. Similarly, grammatically correct sentence structures too are not sufficient to qualify as eloquent and articulate. First, consideration needs to be given to the afore-mentioned congruity. If it is found to be excellent, then balaghah (eloquence) is at its peak. Similarly, if the right choice of words has been made with discernment, then only will fasahah (articulacy) be believed to have reached its pinnacle.

Furthermore, this ‘congruity’ is nothing more than the name for the relationship between words and their meanings. And, as is known, relationships are always more subtle than their objects. Inevitably then, the knowledge of this relationship is more arcane than knowledge of words and meanings. And in cases where meanings themselves are subtle and only very finely distinguishable, this relationship naturally increases in intricacy and complexity. For this reason, the mind sometimes tends to accept two words as meaning the same thing, and hence as synonymous, whereas the reality is on the contrary.

As an example, let us take the words husn and jamal (both roughly meaning beauty). People generally assume they carry the same meaning, whereas the truth is that jamal is an objective quality found in the person attributed with it. The root of the word, j-m-l, guides us to this conclusion as another component of this root is jumlah (sentence), which is speech amalgamated from various components, and hence, jamal is a quality created by the orderly arrangement of various organs and their features. On the other hand, husn is a subjective quality given to the person associated with it by the beholder, depending upon the capacity in which the viewer is able to perceive it. Hence, husn is dependant upon the appreciation of others.

It follows from this that they are not synonymous words and, in fact, husn is actually the appreciation of jamal. If the eyes of the beholder are blemished or his nature perverse, it is not unlikely that they will not be able to appreciate the husn despite the presence of jamal or, to the contrary, will see husn where jamal does not exist.

Even those rhetoricians and experts in literature who have acquired distinction and fame in the subjects of their proficiency and have even earned praise from their critics, use the two words interchangeably without apprehension and treat them as wholly synonymous.

In summary, the majority of notable poets, rhetoricians and literary experts have failed to reach the apogee and essence of balaghah (eloquence), and if a few of them have managed to distinguish between few words, they can never claim to have complete knowledge of the essential congruity and cannot, therefore, know with certainty the occasions of their proper use. This is so because this science cannot be mastered but by one who possesses the following:

[1] His knowledge should transcend all reality.

[2] He should have complete command over and the ability to summon up all the words of at least one language.

[3] The reality and essence of all things are as manifest to him as tangible objects are to human eyes.

[4] He is fully aware of the universal and the specific qualifications as well as the general and the detailed.

By the knowledge of the universal and general is meant that one has a complete and absolute knowledge of, as a principle, the various properties of letters of the alphabet as well as of the various kind of relations and connections that exist in meanings and in the import of words, to convey the essence of which the speaker designates a particular word.

And by the knowledge of the specific and the detailed qualifications is meant knowing the exact inherent properties and import of each individual letter of the alphabet and to have an understanding of its relationship to meaning.”

(This last point appears to be alluding to the Science of the Properties of Letters, commonly referred to as ‘Ilm Asrar al-Huruf or ‘Ilm al-Abjad. It is one of the higher disciplines in the esoteric study of language. Classical contributors to this field include Imam al-Ghazali, Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Sina, Ibn Hayyan etc. Shah Wali Allah has also succinctly written in this field in al-Khayr al-Kathir, a summary of which has been quoted in the footnote on his exposition of the Huruf Muqatta’at.

This science postulates that each letter of the alphabet carries unique intrinsic properties and meanings. Similarly, the combination of letters that creates a semantic value also signifies the amalgamation of the unique properties of its root letters, and hence, carries a deeper esoteric meaning.)

Although Much could be written on this topic, however I think the following story will suffice. I have extracted it from a book called, " Muhammad (Sallallahu alaiyhi wassallam) The Prophet Of Revolution" by Ml Wahiduddin Khan, Who himself has taken the story from Sheikh Tantawis commentary on the Quran. Jawahir fi Al-tafsir Al- Quran Al-Karim.

Sheikh Tantawi (ra) writes " On 13 June 1932, I met an Egyptian writer, Kamil Gilani, who told me an amazing story. One day he was with an American orientalist by the name of Finkle, with whom he enjoyed a deep intellectual relationship."Tell me, are you still among those who consider the Quran a miracle? whispered Finkle in Gilani's ear, adding a laugh to indicate his ridicule of such belief.

He thought that Muslims could only hold this belief in blind faith. It could not be based on any sound objective reasoning. Thinking that his blow had really gone home, Finkle was visibly pleased with himself. Seeing his attitude, Gilani too started laughing. " Before issuing any pronouncement on the the style of the Quran," he said, "we should first have a look and see if we can produce anything comparable to the Quran or not."

Gilani then invited Finkle to join him in putting a Quranic idea into Arabic words. The idea he chose was:' Hell is extremely vast' , Finkle agreed, and both men sat down with pen and paper. Between them, they produced about twenty Arabic sentences. " "Hell is extremely vast," " Hell is vaster than you can imagine,"

"Mans's intelligence cannot fathom the vastness of Hell," and many examples of this nature, were some of the sentences they produced. They tried until they could think of no other sentences to express this idea. Gilani looked at Finkle triumphantly. " Now that we have done our best, we shall be able to see how the Quran stands above all work of men." he said " What, has the quran expressed this idea more eloquently.?" Finkle enquired. " We are like little children compared to the Quran," Gilani told him. Amazed, Finkle asked what was in the Quran.

" On the Day when we Will ask Hell: " Are you full? " And Hell will answer Are there any more? " (50:30)

Finkle was startled on hearing this verse. Amazed at the supreme eloquence of the Quran, he openly admitted defeat." you were right, quite right," he said, " I unreservedly concede defeat." " for you to acknowledge the truth," Gilani replied, " is nothing strange, for you are a man of letters, well aware of the importance of style in language." This particular orientalist was fluent in English, German, Hebrew and Arabic, and had spent all his life studying the literature of these languages..

"It is possible to convey a single meaning with a variety of words, some more expressive than others. Likewise for the two parts – subject and predicate – of a sentence; each may be expressed in the most eloquent manner when taken alongside the other. Therefore, it is necessary [in good composition] to consider the overall meaning of a sentence, then to consider every single word that may be used to convey that meaning, and then to use the most appropriate, expressive and eloquent of those words. This is impossible for man to do consistently, or even most of the time, but it is well within the Knowledge of Allah [whose knowledge is boundless], and thus the Qur'an was considered the best and most eloquent of all speech…"